Rise up, take your journey, and pass over the river Arnon. Behold, I have given into thy hand Sihon the king of Heshbon, the Amorite, and his land begin, take possession, and engage with him in battle.
Israel had just been told to leave Edom, Moab and Ammon alone. Now, at the Arnon, the same voice tells them to attack. Commentators point out that the difference lies entirely in what God said, not in what Israel judged for itself.
In all these different instructions to Israel, the great principle is this: God's word must settle everything for His people. It was not for Israel to ask why they should leave the lands of Esau and Lot untouched, and take those of Sihon. They were simply to do what they were told. God can do as He pleases. He has His eye upon the whole scene. He sees it all.
The chapter trains the people in restraint before it calls them to act.
Verse 24 matches verse 13. In both it is the LORD, not Moses, who commands them to "rise up." Now comes another promise: "Behold," He says, "I have given into your hand Sihon the Amorite." Here then they are called to action. Notice that first of all in this chapter it was not activity but subjection. It may well have been hard for Israel to bear the unfriendliness of the Edomites, Ammonites and Moabites in silence. But whatever the provocation, however much these nations insulted them (and they did), Israel must not lift a hand against their brothers. The LORD reminds them of the connection, and gives those nations the closest name possible — their brothers. They were unfeeling and ready to harm Israel. Still God would train His people to remember every natural bond. If blows came, God would not forget the offender.
God announces what He has done before He tells Israel what to do. Verse 24 says the land is already given; verse 31 says He has begun to give it. (The ESV reads "Begin to take possession" where these writers quote "Begin to possess.")
Verses 24 and 31 deserve special notice. First comes the divine act: "I have given," or, "I have begun to give." Then comes the call to the people: "Begin to possess." God deals with us in grace along the same lines today, as we see in the New Testament letters. First He unfolds what He has given us in Christ. Then come the exhortations. We are to begin to possess in experience all that He has given, in the power of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.
Verse 24 says the land is already handed over; verse 31 says God has only begun to give it. The sequence looks backwards, and one writer argues it is exactly right.
So two things are quite definite. First, God had given. Second, He had also begun to give. A superficial reader might object to this, and demand that if both statements are to stand, they must come in reverse order: first He began to give; second, He had fully given. The scriptural order is, however, the right one. First He gives, so that the title deeds are ours. Then He begins to give practically and in detail, as we begin to possess.
That second half matters, because Israel had once tried the opposite. Forty years earlier they had pushed forward without it.
In Numbers 14 God spoke of Israel's unbelief. Because of it, He would not begin to give them the land for another forty years. Nevertheless the people insisted that they would begin to possess. "Look, we are here, and we will go up," they said. Moses answered, "Do not go up, for the LORD is not among you." Yet they would not listen. They presumed to go up, and were utterly struck down. The title deeds were already theirs. But God had not "begun to give" them the inheritance, so their effort to "begin to possess" came to nothing.
"Contend with him in battle" is a command to fight, yet the fighting starts with Sihon's refusal. Writers draw a line here between defending a God-given claim and picking a fight.
We meet people we do not wish to fight, but they will not let us pass peaceably. Our warfare is with those who hold our inheritance beyond the Jordan. If we are attacked, we must defend ourselves; but we are not to be the aggressors. Israel wants to pass through the land of the Amorites in peace. The Amorites refuse, and so they suffer the results of the war they themselves sought against the people of God. Israel takes their cities. Even on this side of the Jordan, Israel begins to enjoy the promised possession ahead of time.
Why record an old border war at all? Commentators read these nations as a picture of the opposition a believer meets now.
These Canaanite nations surely stand for the "spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places." The book of Joshua shows this in detail. They are the enemies we are in conflict with now.
A gift can still be left unused.
Has God given us these wonderful things so that we may misuse them? Or so that we leave them unused, like a dress hidden away in a drawer until the age to come dawns? To ask such a question is to answer it. God has given the things to us; but we are to begin to possess them.
- Given — God speaks first: the land is already handed over before a sword is drawn. The title deeds come before the campaign.
- Bounded — the same God who gave Sihon's land forbade touching Edom, Moab and Ammon. His word, not Israel's appetite, decided where they could go.
- Timed — Numbers 14 shows the reverse order failing. What God has given, He must also have begun to give. Move before that, and you move without Him.
- Contested — the gift comes through conflict, but Israel did not start it. The Amorites would not let them pass.
- Possessed — a gift left unused is like a dress hidden in a drawer. God has given; we are to begin to take hold.
This day will I begin to put the dread of thee and the fear of thee upon the peoples under the whole heaven; who will hear report of thee, and will tremble, and quake because of thee.
Moses looks back at the day God told Israel to cross the Arnon and take Sihon's land. God tied a promise to that first battle: from that day, the mere report of Israel would do the work an army usually has to do. Why would God spread terror among nations that had never met Israel, and what made that dread just?
The word "begin" ties this promise to the command just before it. God acts first. Then He tells the people to move into what He has already handed over.
Notice verses 24 and 31 in Deuteronomy 2. First comes the Divine act: "I have given," or, "I have begun to give." Then comes the call to the people, "Begin to possess." God deals with us today along the same lines, as we see in the New Testament letters. First He unfolds what He has given us in Christ. Then come the calls to begin to take hold, in real experience, of all that He has given, in the power of the Holy Spirit, who lives in us.
Israel's weapon here is news. The nations hear, and by the time the spies reach Jericho the report has already done its work. That left Israel's earlier refusal to advance without excuse.
First, there are the bolts and bars on the gates of Jericho and the witness of Rahab: "I know that the LORD has given you the land, and that the fear of you has fallen upon us … for we have heard how the LORD dried up the water of the Red Sea before you, when you came out of Egypt … And as soon as we heard it, our hearts melted." That was a rebuke to the Israelites for not going up the first time, as if God, when He gives a command, does not set things in motion to fulfil it. This woman points to the crossing of the Red Sea, forty years earlier, as what filled the Canaanite nations with terror. From the first, the way into the land was open.
The sweep of the phrase has been read in more than one way. One reading takes it as a figure of speech; another sees a reach that runs far past Moses' day.
Some have taken the statement in verse 25, "I will begin to put the dread and fear of you on the peoples who are under the whole heaven," as an overstatement. But it also has a prophetic meaning. The Gentiles fear the Jews and the nations stand in dread of them. Some day the Jewish race will be the head of the nations of the world.
The nations trembling here were not innocent bystanders. Their fall had been waiting a long time.
This is a day of judgment on these nations. So was the day of Noah on the world before the flood, the day of Lot on the cities of the plain, and the day of Moses on the land of Egypt. Read Joshua's sword as a judge's sword, not a conqueror's. Giving the children of Abraham their inheritance may look like the main cause of this great action. But the real ground is this: the sin of the Amorites was now full.
To read such orders rightly, one writer insists on a distinction that changes everything:
We must accurately distinguish between grace and government. When we consider God in government, we see Him displaying His power in the way of righteousness, punishing evildoers, pouring out vengeance upon His enemies, overthrowing empires, upturning thrones, destroying cities, sweeping away nations, tribes and peoples.
God did not flatter the people He was making feared. His severity ran hardest against His own.
Is this not very notable? Here was the thorough sifting and scrutiny of God — with whom most? With the enemies? Not at all, but His own people. In His dealings with them He applied a higher standard, and far more severity. The judgment on the children of Israel was far stricter than on all their enemies put together. Not one man of the congregation of the LORD who left Egypt entered the holy land, except two men. From the very first, those two had identified themselves by faith with the glory of the LORD.
The same melting heart that ruined Jericho's defenders saved one woman in it.
But the word of God comes to her: "We have heard," she said to the spies. It was a word that promised grace and deliverance to some, and judgment to others. Her faith in this word puts her conscience at once under the weight of that judgment. "As soon as we heard it our hearts melted." Like her people, she is full of fear. But they had lost all courage, while for her this very fear is the beginning of wisdom. It is the fear of the Lord, a fear that makes her look to God.
- Begin — God gives first, then commands. "I have given" comes before "begin to possess," and He deals with believers today in the same order.
- Report — the dread spreads by hearing, not by fighting. News of the Red Sea had opened the land forty years before Israel drew a sword.
- Reach — some read "under the whole heaven" as an overstatement. It also carries a promise: the nations will yet stand in dread.
- Judgment — the terror was deserved. The sin of the Amorites was full, and the sword that fell was a judge's sword, not a conqueror's.
- Response — the same report that melted Jericho's soldiers turned Rahab to God. Fear becomes the beginning of wisdom when it drives a person to Him.
And I sent messengers out of the wilderness of Kedemoth unto Sihon the king of Heshbon with words of peace, saying,
Israel is camped east of the Arnon river, and God has already handed Sihon's land to them. Yet Moses' first move is to send messengers, not soldiers. Why offer peace to a king whose land is already promised away?
Two things about Sihon shaped what came next: where his people came from, and the fact that Israel had asked another nation the same favour before.
Sihon was an Amorite. This race descended from Ham through Canaan (Genesis 10:15-16). Moses sent messengers to Sihon with a peaceful intention. He asked to pass through his land, keeping only to the highway, and offered to pay for food and water (verses 26-27). They had done the same in regard to Edom, but this time the results were different. The Amorite was not their brother as was Esau.
The message carried no threat and no bribe.
Let us see the principles of the Lord's discipline here. Did He authorise Israel to force Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand and the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort... Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin; and only so did Israel strike down and dispossess the king of Heshbon.
Just before this, God had told Israel to leave the lands of Esau and Lot alone. Why spare those and take Sihon's? The answer lay in God's word, not in Israel's own judgement.
In all these different instructions to Israel, the great principle is this: God's word must settle everything for His people. Israel was not to ask why they must leave the possessions of Esau and Lot untouched and take those of Sihon. They were simply to do what they were told. God can do as He pleases. He has His eye upon the whole scene. He sees it all.
God sent words of peace to an enemy king. With His own people He was far stricter.
"So I sent messengers from the wilderness of Kedemoth to Sihon the king of Heshbon, with words of peace." Is this not very notable? What a difference between God's conduct of His people, and man's corruption of it!... There was the thorough sifting and scrutiny of God — with whom most? With the enemies? Not at all, but His own people. God judged the children of Israel far more strictly — beyond all comparison — than He judged all their enemies put together.
What Moses did at Kedemoth was no one-off act of politeness. God made it the rule for Israel's later wars: before attacking a city, they had to offer it peace.
There is beautiful consideration on His part for the enemy. When they came near a city under threat, they were first called to proclaim peace to it. It was a strange way of making war, but worthy of God. He took no pleasure in war. He would train His people to go out, even to fight, remembering that their own feet were fitted with "the readiness given by the gospel of peace," if I may put it that way... God then deals with them just as seriously, in keeping with how real the earlier offer of peace was.
Sihon said no. His refusal looks like one king's choice, but something stood behind it. The refusal did not spoil the offer of peace. It brought to a head the guilt of a nation whose time was up.
What Moses emphasises here, as it suits his purpose, is that God gave him into their hand. Even the stubbornness that refused to let the advancing army pass came from Him. The guilt of the Amorites was now full, and their sentence of destruction is stressed too: Israel became simply the executioners of God's judgment. Neither greed for land nor love of destruction in Israel brought this merciless rooting out on Sihon and his people. The mercy was for the world, in rooting out of it a deadly evil... The carrying out of God's sentence, put into Israel's hand, was well fitted to impress them with a sense of God's holiness that should not leave them.
- Peace first. Before anyone drew a sword, messengers went out with words of peace — a strange way of making war, but worthy of God.
- Terms, not tricks. No threats and no flattery — only an offer to keep to the highway and pay for food and water.
- God's word, not appetite. Israel left the lands of Esau and Lot untouched and took Sihon's. They did what God told them, and no more.
- Refusal exposed. Sihon's stubbornness was itself of God, because the guilt of the Amorites was now full.
- Judgment as mercy. Israel carried out God's sentence. The mercy in it was for the world — and the mark it left on Israel was a sense of God's holiness.
Let me pass through thy land by the highway alone will I go; I will neither turn to the right hand nor to the left.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
Thou shalt sell me food for money that I may eat; and thou shalt give me water for money that I may drink; I will only pass through on my feet,
Moses recalls the message he once sent to Sihon, king of Heshbon: give us the road through your country, and we will pay for every meal and every drink. Sihon said no, and war followed — so why did a nation with God's promise behind it ask permission at all?
Israel came to Sihon as buyers, not as conquerors. One writer asks whether God told Israel to use threats, flattery, or the sword.
In this case let us see the principles of Jehovah's discipline. Did He authorise Israel to force Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand and the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort. Look at the way Jehovah treated even these enemies of Israel. "Let me pass through your land. I will go only by the road… You shall sell me food for money, that I may eat, and give me water for money, that I may drink. Only let me pass through on foot." … Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin.
Israel had already travelled past Esau's people on these terms. God had given them their land, so Israel bought what it used.
God takes an interest in the affairs of nations. He gives kingdoms, provinces and lands as He sees fit… God will never surrender His rights in this respect. He would not allow Israel to touch a single scrap of Esau's property. They were, to use a modern phrase, to pay ready cash for whatever they needed, and go quietly on their way. Indiscriminate slaughter and plunder were not to be thought of by the people of God.
Sihon got the same courteous offer Edom had. The difference lay in who received it.
Sihon was an Amorite. This race descended from Ham through Canaan (Gen. 10:15-16). Moses sent messengers to Sihon with a peaceful intention, asking to pass through his land strictly by the highway, offering to pay for food and water (vv. 26-27). They had done the same in regard to Edom, but this time the results were different. The Amorite was not their brother as Esau was.
The outcome of the two refusals also differed. Edom's "no" turned Israel aside; Sihon's "no" opened the first conquest.
In both cases they were refused permission to pass. In the case of Edom, Israel turned away from them and went around that land. But God hardened the spirit of Sihon with the object of delivering him into Israel's hand (v. 30).
If the terms were fair, why did war follow? One writer points to the guilt of the Amorites, and says plainly what did not drive Israel.
What is emphasised here, as suited to Moses' purpose, is that God gave him into their hand. Even the stubbornness that refused passage to the advancing host was of Him. The guilt of the Amorites was now full, so Israel became simply the executioners of God's judgment. On Israel's part it was neither lust of possession nor passion for destroying that brought this merciless removal on Sihon and his people. The mercy was for the world, in rooting out of it a virulent evil.
Deuteronomy 2 sorts the nations into two groups. That sorting carries a lesson for the reader today.
The path itself is barely touched on. What we have instead is Israel's different relation to the different nations they pass — Edom, Moab and Ammon on the one hand, and the Amorites on the other. Israel is strictly forbidden to meddle with the first group. They are told to make war on the Amorites, and that land becomes Israel's first possession. So we can be sure of this: as we travel on, it is important to know what to fight and what simply to pass by.
The same distinction applies on our own journey:
With the men of the flesh, the children of this world, we may trade as we travel on toward heaven. We must not fight with them. Their land is not ours. Our possessions are elsewhere — a good land, which forbids coveting any other.
- Pass through. Israel asked for a road, not a country. The message to Sihon sounds like someone on his way elsewhere.
- Pay for it. Israel paid ready cash for food and water and took no plunder. God had given that land to another, and He keeps His rights.
- Ask courteously. No threats, no flattery, no law in one hand and a sword in the other. Israel kept the path of right and courtesy.
- Refusal hardens. Sihon heard the same peaceful terms Edom had heard. God hardened his spirit, and that stubbornness delivered him into Israel's hand.
- Possess what is given. The road he blocked became Israel's first possession. Know what to fight and what to walk past.
-- as the children of Esau who dwell in Seir, and the Moabites who dwell in Ar, did to me, -- until I shall pass over the Jordan into the land which Jehovah our God giveth us.
Moses is recalling his message to Sihon, king of Heshbon: let Israel pass through, and they will pay for their food and water. Esau's descendants and the Moabites had allowed this, so why did the same polite message end in war, and why pay at all?
Israel came to Sihon's border with God's promise of the land behind them. Yet Moses sent no threat. One writer asks what God allowed Israel to do:
Did He authorise Israel to force Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand and the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort... Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin; and only so did Israel strike down and dispossess the king of Heshbon.
The offer to buy food and water rested on God's own ruling about who owns what. He had already settled that question over Edom's land:
They forget that God takes an interest in the affairs of nations; that He hands out kingdoms, provinces and lands as He sees fit... They do not understand the meaning and force of this simple sentence, "I have given Mount Seir to Esau for a possession." God will never give up His rights in this matter. He would not allow Israel to touch a single scrap of Esau's property. They were, to use a modern phrase, to pay ready cash for whatever they needed, and go quietly on their way. The people of God were not to think of indiscriminate slaughter and plunder... God was going to give them the land of Canaan, as He had promised Abraham. But the same hand that was giving them Canaan had given Mount Seir to Esau.
God had carried Israel for forty years. One writer shows why that left them no reason to covet:
"You shall buy food from them for money, so that you may eat. You shall also buy water from them for money, so that you may drink. For the LORD your God has blessed you in all the work of your hand. He knows your walking through this great wilderness. These forty years the LORD your God has been with you. You have lacked nothing." Why should they covet? They had to learn not to seek what God would not give them. That is the point — to do God's will.
Moses points to Esau's descendants as a people who let Israel by. One writer notes that the record tells a harder story:
Yet they were not to meddle with Edom, for God had given it as a possession to Esau. They would be permitted to buy food and water from them. The historical record does not say that they bought anything from Edom, however, for Edom strongly refused to allow them passage through their land.
Commentators differ here. Kelly sees courtesy; another writer draws a line between Edom's land and land God had already given to Israel:
The land of Edom and of Moab formed no part of Israel's promised possession; it was God's command that they should not be dispossessed. The land of the Amorite was given. Was it of faith to ask merely to pass through it? The request did bring out their hatred, and their attempt to hinder Israel. Their destruction was the result. But the question remains — ought not Israel to have taken possession at once?
The message looks past Sihon's land to the Jordan and to the land God is giving. One writer finds the same pattern in the Christian life:
First comes the divine act: "I have given," or, "I have begun to give." Then comes the call to the people, "Begin to possess." God's gracious dealings with us today run along similar lines... First, the unfolding of what He has given us in Christ. Then, the call that we should begin to possess in experience all that is given, in the power of the Holy Spirit, who lives in us.
- Given — God hands out lands as He sees fit. "I have given Mount Seir to Esau" settled it, and Israel could not touch a scrap.
- Supplied — Forty years of lacking nothing left no excuse to covet. A people carried by God can afford to pay their way.
- Courteous — No threats, no flattery, no law in one hand and sword in the other. Israel kept the path of right and courtesy.
- Questioned — Writers differ: was it faith to ask permission to cross land God had already given?
- Onward — The whole request aimed at the Jordan: what God gives first, His people then begin to possess.
But Sihon the king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him; for Jehovah thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obdurate, that he might give him into thy hand, as it is this day.
Israel asked Sihon for nothing but safe passage, and the king refused. Moses traces that refusal back to God, which raises the hardest question in the chapter: if God hardened Sihon, how was Sihon guilty?
The fighting did not start with Israel:
In this case let us see the principles of Jehovah's discipline. Did He authorise Israel to force Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him over by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand and the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort… Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin; and only so did Israel strike down and dispossess the king of Heshbon.
Writers here draw a sharp line between two very different acts of God:
There is a hardening in certain cases. God cannot make a person wicked, or tempt him to be wicked. But He can harden a sinner, and in judgment give him up to blindness… In all this history, notice that God does not make man wicked. He only gives man up to what he is.
That giving-up has a visible result. The man stops seeing where he is heading:
Jehovah did not make them wicked. But it was from Jehovah that these men, already wicked and careless about His will and His warnings, should not now believe their danger — that they should dare on blindly to their own destruction. God never makes a person a sinner. But when men are wicked and are following their own lusts or passions, He may close and seal their eyes. Then they no longer see the folly of what they are doing, or the danger they are running into.
Hardening is never where God starts:
This hardening comes before destruction. But it comes after man has ripened his own iniquity… "Whom He will He hardens" is true. Yet He chooses to show His wrath this way, by hardening, only in the case of those He has borne with in much patience.
This timing changes what Israel's army was that day:
What Moses stresses here is that God gave Sihon into their hand. Even the stubbornness that refused passage to the advancing army came from Him. The iniquity of the Amorites was now full, so the sentence of destruction laid on them is dwelt on too. By it Israel became only the executioners of God's judgment. Neither greed for land nor a passion for destroying drove them to wipe out Sihon and his people so mercilessly. The mercy was for the world, in rooting out of it a virulent evil.
It had happened before, to Pharaoh:
Sihon's measure of wickedness and cruelty was full. God hardened his spirit as He had Pharaoh's, and Israel overthrew him and his kingdom completely.
Writers use different words for this. Some say sovereignty. Others say government — God dealing with a man by what that man has done:
Pharaoh was already resisting God. He was already acting with cruel brutality toward the people of God. So the hardening of his heart was governmental, and deserved, not an arbitrary use of sovereignty. On top of that, we find Pharaoh hardening his own heart again and again. What fault can anyone find with God doing to him what he chose to do for himself?
The verse states God's aim: to give Sihon into Israel's hand. The verses around it show the order God works in:
First comes the Divine act: "I have given," or, "I have begun to give." Then comes the call to the people, "Begin to take possession." God deals with us in the same way today… First, He unfolds what He has given us in Christ. Then come the calls to begin taking hold, in real experience, of all He has given, in the power of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.
- Ripened. Hardening never starts the story. It falls only on a man whose sin God has already borne with in long patience.
- Given up. God does not make anyone wicked. He gives a wicked man over to what he already is, and seals his eyes to his own danger.
- Answerable. Sihon still chose to attack. Israel asked only for passage and kept the path of right and courtesy; the aggression was his.
- Executioners. The guilt of the Amorites was full. So Israel's sword was a judge's sword, not a robber's — and rooting out that evil was mercy to the whole world.
- Given, then taken. God said "I have begun to give" before He said "Begin to take possession." He works the same way now: He hands us what is ours in Christ, then calls us to make it our own.
And Jehovah said to me, Behold, I begin to give Sihon and his land before thee begin, take possession, that thou mayest possess his land.
At the edge of Amorite territory, God tells Moses He has begun to hand over King Sihon and his land. In the same breath He commands Israel to start taking it — so why must a people fight for what God says He has given?
One commentator points to the pattern in the wording of verses 24 and 31.
In Deuteronomy 2 Moses reminds the people of how God had been with them in their earlier conquests. We should pay special attention to verses 24 and 31. First comes the Divine act: "I have given," or, "I have begun to give." Then comes the call to the people, "Begin to possess." God's gracious dealings with us today follow the same lines, as we see in the New Testament letters. First, He unfolds what He has given us in Christ. Then come the calls to begin to possess, in actual experience, all that He has given, in the power of the Holy Spirit, who lives in us.
Verse 24 says God gave the land; verse 31 says He has only begun to give it. That order looks backwards, and the same writer takes it up.
So two things are quite definite. First, God had given. Second, He had also begun to give. A reader who looks only at the surface might object to this. At the very least he would demand that, if we accept both statements, they must stand in reverse order: first, He began to give; second, He had fully given. But the order Scripture gives is the right one. First He gives so that the title deeds are ours. Then He begins to give practically and in detail, as we begin to possess.
Israel had once tried to take land without this word, and the outcome was very different.
In Numbers 14, we read how God said that because of their unbelief, He would not begin to give the land to Israel for another forty years. Nevertheless the people insisted that they would begin to possess. "Here we are, and we will go up," they said. Moses replied, "Do not go up, for the LORD is not among you." Yet they would not listen. They presumed to go up, and were completely beaten. At that time the title deeds were already theirs. But God had not yet "begun to give" them the inheritance, so their move to "begin to possess" came to nothing.
God had told Israel to leave the lands of Esau and Lot untouched. With Sihon's land He said the opposite, and one writer draws out the principle behind both orders.
The great principle, in all these varied instructions to Israel, is that God's word must settle everything for His people. It was not for Israel to ask why they should leave the lands of Esau and Lot untouched and seize those of Sihon. They were simply to do what they were told. God can do as He pleases. He has His eye upon the whole scene. He sees it all.
God's gift of the land did not turn Israel into the aggressor.
In this case let us look at the principles of the LORD's discipline. Did He authorise Israel to bully Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him over by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand and the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort... Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed at them to his own ruin, and only in that way did Israel defeat the king of Heshbon and take his land.
This victory comes before Israel ever crosses the Jordan.
Israel wants to pass quietly through the land of the Amorites, but the Amorites will not allow it. They suffer the consequences of the war they had sought against the people of God. Israel takes their cities, and already on this side of the Jordan begins to enjoy in advance the possession of the promise.
The next verse records Sihon marching out to battle. One writer treats that order of events as normal, not as a setback.
As soon as we begin to possess, opposition springs up. The old powers do not yield without a struggle. It is a stern business. It means saying "No" to many things which are not the things freely given to us of God. It means effort, conflict and trouble. But it is well worth it. Then comes the joy of victory — the joy of actually holding a little more of what is already ours by a title no one can dispute, because God gave it.
- Given first. The Divine act comes before the command: "I have begun to give" stands ahead of "begin to possess."
- Given twice. God gives the title outright, then begins to give in practice as His people move to take hold.
- Given in time. Numbers 14 shows the reverse: without God's "begun to give," taking hold comes to nothing.
- Given by His word. Israel seized Sihon's land and spared Esau's and Lot's for one reason: God's word settles everything for His people.
- Given through conflict. The moment possession starts, opposition rises. Sihon came out to fight, and the joy of real possession lay beyond that battle.
And Sihon came out against us for battle, he and all his people, to Jahaz.
Israel had asked only for safe passage along the road, yet Sihon marched his whole army out to Jahaz to stop them. This verse is where refusal turned into battle. It shows both the stubbornness of a doomed king and the first move of a people learning to take what God had already given them.
Israel had done nothing to provoke this attack. One writer asks how God told Israel to deal with Sihon, king of Heshbon:
In this case let us see the principles of Jehovah's discipline. Did He authorise Israel to force Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand and the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort... Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin; and only so did Israel strike down and dispossess the king of Heshbon.
Israel had just passed the lands of Esau and Lot without taking anything. Why seize Sihon's land and not theirs?
The great principle, in all these varied instructions to Israel, is that God's word must settle everything for His people. It was not for Israel to ask why they were to leave the possessions of Esau and Lot untouched, and to seize those of Sihon. They were simply to do what they were told. God can do as He pleases. He has His eye upon the whole scene.
Why did Sihon march out at all? One writer looks behind the king's stubbornness:
What this passage stresses, as suited to Moses' purpose, is that God gave him into their hand. Even the stubbornness that refused passage to the advancing army came from Him. The sin of the Amorites was now full, so the passage dwells on the order to destroy them completely. By this, Israel became simply the ones who carried out God's judgment. It was not a craving to possess, nor a passion for destroying, that brought this merciless wiping out on Sihon and his people.
after_note: DELETE The mercy was for the world, in rooting out of it a virulent evil.
Another writer notes the same hardening elsewhere in Israel's history, describing such kings as rushing "upon the thick bosses of the Almighty's shield" — charging, in a spirit bent on self-destruction, at the very defence of God.
God spoke of the gift before Israel fought a single battle for it. One writer sees the same order in the way God deals with us:
First comes the divine act: "I have given," or, "I have begun to give." Then comes the call to the people, "Begin to possess." God's gracious dealings with us today run on similar lines... First, the unfolding of what He has given us in Christ. Then, the call to begin to possess in experience all that is given, in the power of the Holy Spirit, who lives in us.
The moment Israel acted on that word, Sihon came out. The same writer applies this to us:
As soon as we begin to possess, opposition springs up. The old powers do not give way without a struggle. It is a hard business. It means saying "No" to many things which are not the things freely given to us of God. It means exercise and conflict and trouble. But it is well worth it. Then comes the joy of victory. It is the joy of actually holding a little more of what is ours, by a title no one can question, given by God.
The names in the verse carry meaning of their own. One writer works through Sihon, Heshbon and Jahaz:
There is little agreement about his name, though what seems to come most properly from the Hebrew root is "sweeping off"... or, it may be, "sweeping away," as pride of intellect would sweep away the things of God. Scripture always calls him king of Heshbon, where he lived — a word that the usual English version translates only as "account," "device," or "reason." It certainly gives the thought of mental work. He comes out to meet Israel at Jahaz, which Gesenius gives as "a place trodden down," probably a "threshing-floor."
This first fight had a purpose beyond itself:
On this occasion, when Sihon and his army attacked, Israel did not meet him with talk, but with decided action. By the grace and power of God they defeated this proud enemy, and took possession of his cities. In this way Israel was showing something of the courage of faith before they actually entered the land of Canaan. So God was preparing them for the conquest of the land.
- Given — God said "I have given" before Israel moved; the title came first, the fighting second.
- Possess — the gift still had to be taken up. Israel acted on the word to hold what was already theirs.
- Opposed — the moment Israel moved, Sihon came out to Jahaz. Opposition comes with possession; it is not a sign of a wrong turn.
- Judged — Sihon's refusal carried out a sentence long overdue. Israel acted as God's executioners, not as looters.
- Trained — this first battle came outside the land. It proved the courage of faith before Israel entered the true inheritance.
But Jehovah our God gave him up before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and his whole people.
Israel's long years in the wilderness ended in a battle with Sihon, king of Heshbon. The verse raises two questions: who won that day, and by what right did Israel wipe out a whole people?
Moses had first asked Sihon for peaceful passage, offering to pay for food and water. One writer shows how careful God was to leave Israel blameless.
Did He authorise Israel to force Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him over by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand and the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort... Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin; and only so did Israel strike down and dispossess the king of Heshbon.
Another writer draws out the rule Israel lived by: fight when attacked, never first.
We meet people with whom we do not wish to have war, but they will not let us pass in peace... If we are attacked, we must defend ourselves; but we are not to be the aggressors. Israel wishes to pass quietly through the land of the Amorites. The Amorites will not allow it, and they suffer the consequences of the war they had sought against the people of God.
The verse says God gave Sihon over, and only then that Israel struck. That order matters. One writer keeps the credit where the verse puts it:
It was not Israel's power that accomplished this. Apart from the power of God, they could have accomplished nothing.
The killing of Sihon's sons and all his people is the hardest line in the verse. One explanation points to the Amorites' own wrongdoing, which was now full.
What is emphasised here... is that God gave him into their hand. Even the stubbornness that refused passage to the advancing army came from Him. The wrongdoing of the Amorites was now full... Israel was not driven by greed for land, nor by a passion for destroying, when this merciless wiping out came on Sihon and his people. The mercy was for the world, in rooting out of it a poisonous evil.
That same writer adds that Israel became "simply the executioners of the divine judgment." Another writer faces the obvious objection: what makes this different from any other bloody conquest?
Will anyone dare to compare this with what history records about the Spanish invasion of South America?... There is one great and all-important difference. Israel had the direct authority of God for what they did to Sihon and Og. The Spaniards could show no such authority for what they did.
This battle came before Israel ever set foot in Canaan, and it served a purpose beyond itself.
Sihon's name means "sweeping away," because mere talk sweeps away all that is good; it is empty vanity. When Sihon and his army attacked, Israel did not meet him with talk, but with decided action. By the grace and power of God they defeated this proud enemy, and took possession of his cities. So Israel showed something of the courage of faith before they entered the land of Canaan. In this way God was preparing them for the conquest of the land.
The defeat of Og shortly afterwards is described in similar terms — "a pledge of the full victory which the Lord would give over the nations of Canaan."
God told Israel He had given Sihon into their hand. Sihon still came out to fight. One writer finds the same pattern in Christian living: God gives, we take hold, and resistance follows.
As soon as we begin to possess, opposition springs up. The old powers do not yield without a struggle. It is hard work. It means saying "No" to many things which are not the things freely given to us by God. It means effort and conflict and trouble. But it is well worth it. Then comes the joy of victory. It is the joy of truly holding a little more of what is ours by an unbreakable title, as God's gift.
- Given — God announced the gift before the battle. Israel fought for what was already theirs, not for what was not.
- Provoked — Sihon chose the war. Israel asked to pass through and pay their way; the aggression, and the ruin, were his.
- Delivered — the verse credits God with handing Sihon over. Without His power Israel could have done nothing.
- Executed — God's sentence fell on the Amorites because their wrongdoing was now full. Israel carried it out under His direct authority, and that is what sets it apart from ordinary conquest.
- Possessed — this first victory trained Israel in the courage of faith. It also pictures how we take real hold of what God has already given.
And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed every city, men, and women, and little ones we let none escape.
Moses looks back here at Israel's war with Sihon, king of Heshbon, and reports that Israel spared no one. Few verses raise sharper questions: was this cruelty, and does God ask anything like it of His people today?
Israel did not set out to conquer Sihon. The war began with Sihon's own attack.
Did God authorise Israel to force Sihon by threats of vengeance, or to win him by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand or the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort... Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin; and only so did Israel strike down and dispossess the king of Heshbon.
Critics have long used this verse to attack the character of God. Commentators answer by pointing to what these peoples had become.
Many an unbeliever has sneered at this statement and blasphemed God. They charge Him with cruelty and injustice for allowing such an extermination of human beings. God is righteous. These people were steeped in every kind of vice and wickedness, like the depravity and vilest corruption of the Canaanites. God had to deal in judgment with them. He could not permit them to exist, and as the sovereign God He dealt with them in His righteous government.
This was not a new kind of act. Two earlier judgments stood behind it, with one difference.
The first case was of course the flood... The second was the destruction of the cities of the plain, including Sodom and Gomorrah. Only righteous Lot and two daughters were saved. On these two occasions the destruction was an act of God — by water and by fire and brimstone. In both cases human corruption had risen to such a height that it could not be further tolerated. This was now the case with the Amorite nations. Some four hundred years earlier God had told Abraham, "the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete" (Gen. 15:16). Now it was plainly complete. God purposed to wipe them out, as He had already done with the world before the flood and then with Sodom — only this time using Israel to do it. And because He used men to do His strange work of judgment, failure came in, and the work was not done thoroughly, as it was when God acted by the forces of nature.
Commentators differ on the hardest part of the verse. One gives a reason:
The terrible, indiscriminate slaughter of a whole culture may seem wrong to us. But God is wiser than we are. He knows what He is doing. Idolatry and demon worship had risen to such a height that there was no hope of recovery (1 Kings 21:26). Little children would be better dead than exposed to the evil their parents indulged in. Parents would be better dead than left to continue in the abominations that were common throughout their whole society.
Another says the question is beyond us, and hands it back to God.
Are we able to unravel the deep and awful mysteries of God's providence? Can we — are we even asked to — explain the terrible fact of helpless babies caught up in the judgement of their guilty parents? Scornful unbelief may sneer at these things. Morbid sentimentality may stumble over them. But the true believer, the devoted Christian, the reverent student of holy scripture will meet them all with one simple, safe and solid question: "Shall not the judge of all the earth do right?"
Wiping the nations out had a second purpose, aimed at Israel themselves.
Israel were meant to be the executioners of God's judgment on these utterly corrupt peoples. Wiping them out was designed to have a healthy effect on Israel themselves. It would have kept them from marrying the daughters of those peoples. Such marriages were the surest way for Israel to catch the infection of those awful idolatrous systems... Failing to judge and destroy the evil completely, they caught its infection and fell under its power.
Writers draw a sharp line between Israel's task then and the Christian's now.
The Lord put the sword of judgment into Israel's hands and commanded them to use it with unrelenting severity in certain cases. It was an honour given to them to carry out the judgment written. The same divine Lawgiver said to Saul, "Utterly destroy, and spare them not." That was in perfect harmony with the dispensation of the law. Now, in the day of salvation, He says to His redeemed, "Love your enemies... and pray for those who persecute you" (Matt. 5). This is the surpassing honour put upon those who are Christ's.
- Provocation — Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon attacked first, and only then did Israel strike him down.
- Patience — God waited four hundred years for the iniquity of the Amorites to be complete. This was judgment long delayed, not sudden anger.
- Precedent — the flood and Sodom were the same judgment by God's own hand. Here He used Israel instead, and the work was left unfinished.
- Protection — sparing survivors would have meant marriage with them, and then idolatry. Israel's later history proved it.
- Present — the command to spare none belonged to the age of law. Christ's people now are told to love their enemies and pray for those who persecute them.
Only the cattle we took as booty for ourselves, and the spoil of the cities which we took.
Moses is looking back at Israel's war with Sihon, king of Heshbon. Israel destroyed the people of every city and carried away only the animals and goods. That one exception raises two questions. Why was the war so total, and why did God let His people keep the plunder?
The word belonged to ordinary warfare. Scripture treats it as a right, not as theft:
The goods an army seized when it captured a city. Unless God forbade it, as He did at Jericho, it counted as a lawful prize. The Israelites suffered in the same way when their enemies captured their cities.
Notice the order: the people first, the goods afterwards. One writer looks behind the whole campaign to God's hand in it:
What Moses stresses here is that God gave Sihon into their hand. Even the stubbornness that refused to let Israel pass came from Him, since the sin of the Amorites was now full. So the order to destroy them completely is dwelt on too. By it Israel became simply the ones who carried out God's judgment. It was neither greed nor a love of destroying that brought this merciless wiping out on Sihon and his people. The mercy was for the world, in tearing a deadly evil out of it.
One writer draws a line here that must not be blurred:
We must carefully distinguish between grace and government. When we look at God in government, we see Him using His power in the way of righteousness. He punishes evildoers and pours out vengeance on His enemies. He overthrows empires, topples thrones, destroys cities, and sweeps away nations, tribes and peoples. We find Him commanding His people to put men, women and little children to the sword, to set fire to their houses, and to turn their cities into heaps of ruins.
The same writer notes that Israel was never given reasons, only orders:
It was not for Israel to ask why they should leave the lands of Esau and Lot untouched and seize Sihon's. They were simply to do what they were told.
Why should the winners end up richer? One commentator finds a principle here, and then a picture for the believer:
The victory is not just a beating back of the enemy. It is a real gain of fresh supplies. Faith, no doubt, always gathers fresh riches from every conflict. The spoil of the enemy does not rightly belong to them, but to those who overcome them. This spoil, again, may well remind us of those fresh views of Christ which we gain from the very conflict in which we have engaged for Him.
God gave the land first, and then told Israel to take it. One writer finds the same pattern in the Christian life:
As soon as we begin to take possession, opposition springs up. The old powers do not yield without a struggle. It is a stern business. It means saying "No" to many things that are not the things God has freely given us. It means exercise and conflict and trouble. But it is well worth it. Then comes the joy of victory: the joy of holding a little bit more of what is already ours by a title no one can dispute, because God gave it.
The spoil could still be held wrongly. One commentator gives a rule for holding anything won from the world:
The spiritual explains the natural here, as so often elsewhere. As heavenly men the world belongs to us, but only to use as heavenly men. Gilead and Bashan may be ours as an outlying possession, but Canaan is the land of our inheritance and of our hearts. The world is ours, only as we are Christ's. It belongs to us, and therefore we do not belong to it.
- Given — the land was God's gift before a sword was drawn. The fighting followed the gift; it never earned it.
- Governed — the destruction belongs to God's government of the earth. There He punishes evildoers and sweeps away nations. Keep it apart from grace.
- Commanded — Israel was not given reasons, only orders: leave Esau and Lot alone, strike Sihon. Obedience rested on God's word, not on Israel's judgment.
- Gained — the enemy's goods do not rightly belong to him but to the one who overcomes him. Every real conflict for Christ leaves the believer richer, not just safer.
- Guarded — the same spoil can still be held wrongly. Gilead and Bashan may be ours, but Canaan is the inheritance. The world is ours only while we belong to Christ and not to it.
From Aroer, which is on the bank of the river Arnon, and the city that is in the ravine even to Gilead, there was not one city too strong for us Jehovah our God delivered all before us.
This verse closes Israel's first real conquest: the land of Sihon the Amorite, from Aroer on the Arnon gorge up to Gilead. Moses ends the list of captured cities not with Israel's skill but with one line about who really won them.
Two things brought this campaign about: Sihon's own guilt, and God's dealing with him.
Sihon's measure of wickedness and cruelty was full. His spirit was hardened like Pharaoh's, and Israel completely overthrew him and his kingdom. "The LORD our God gave all into our hands" (verse 36). Read Psalm 136:19-26. It was His mercy. And His mercy endures forever and is blessedly on our side.
Earlier in the chapter God told Israel to leave some neighbours alone. Israel never had to work out the reason.
The great principle, in all these varied instructions to Israel, is that God's word must settle everything for His people. Israel was not to ask why they should leave the lands of Esau and Lot untouched and seize Sihon's. They were simply to do what they were told. God can do as He pleases. He has His eye upon the whole scene. He sees it all.
Israel took every one of these cities. What drove them was not what drives other armies.
Moses stresses one thing here, because it suits his purpose: God gave Sihon into their hand. Even the stubbornness that refused to let Israel's advancing army pass came from Him. The wickedness of the Amorites was now full, and so the ban laid on them is dwelt on as well. Under that ban Israel simply became the ones who carried out God's judgment. Neither greed for land nor a taste for destroying brought this total destruction on Sihon and his people. The mercy was for the world, in rooting out of it a poisonous evil.
Israel did not start this war. They used neither threats nor flattery on Sihon.
Did God authorize Israel to force Sihon into line with threats of vengeance, or to win him over by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand and the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort... Israel kept to the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed at them to his own ruin. Only then did Israel strike down the king of Heshbon and take his land.
The point of "not a city too high for us" reaches past the Arnon. The generation listening had once refused to enter Canaan because the people there looked too strong.
Moses gave these addresses only after the fall of two special enemies, Sihon and Og. The victory over these two held the prediction of further victory in the land. Israel had been afraid to enter the land before, because of enemies like these. Og was a giant (Deuteronomy 3:11). Now God had given them a lesson from experience that should encourage them.
Earlier in the chapter God said "I have given" first. Only then did He tell Israel to begin to take possession. One writer sees the same order in the Christian life.
First comes the Divine act: "I have given," or, "I have begun to give." Then comes the call to the people: "Begin to take possession." God's gracious dealings with us today follow similar lines, as we see in the New Testament letters. First, He unfolds what He has given us in Christ. Then come the calls to begin to take hold, in real experience, of all that He has given, in the power of the Holy Spirit, who lives in us.
- Given — The last word on the campaign is that the LORD handed it all over. The list of captured cities records mercy, not Israel's strength.
- Governed — God's word alone decided which land Israel took and which it left alone.
- Guilt — The Amorites' guilt was full. Israel carried out a sentence; it did not grab what it wanted.
- Guiltless — Israel used neither threats nor flattery. Sihon rushed at them, and his own ruin followed.
- Guarantee — No city on the Arnon stood too high, so none in Canaan would either. That first victory was the lesson for every fear still ahead. And what God gives, He then calls us to take hold of.